Scotland Guide?

[Sith_Lord]

So I was reading a thread and a lot of people said that playing as Scotland is very difficult. Well.. I figure maybe we should pool our collective knowledge and form a Scotland guide.

Here's a few pointers, I'll be back with more later-

-Take your whole army to york (leave only one family member and how ever many units can keep Edinburgh happy on Very High tax level) and it will surrender 3/4 of the time. Then move your army to siege Nottingham. Wait until England brings its full stack relief force. Defeat the relief force and castle garrison in the battle and BAM! you know have a well developped (early) castle and you've effectively destroyed England's military power in the Isles.

-The rebel settlements of Dublin and Inverness can wait until you've knocked the English out of the Isles (or out of the game) but take Caernarvon as the English may attempt to take it.

-Convert Caernarvon and Inverness (once you capture them) into cities. Nottingham is a good castle and all you need in a remote location such as the isles. You'll be cheating yourself out of some nice taxes by leaving them as castles.

-Initiate trade rights with Denmark and build as many ports as possible. This will ensure a healthy flow from sea trade.

-Send a diplomat down and start bribing the pope so that you will be able to chose the crusade targets. Jerusalem is on the other end of the map and may not be where you want to send you armies at the moment.



More later. Feel free to add!

Sith_Lord

[Double A]

Or you can choose to send 7 peasants and a bad general on a "Crusade" that will fail. Or someone else will get there first.

[Poach]

If you're good at battles then yes, rush the English and annihilate them nice and early.

The main advice is already there: Forget the Scottish rebels. They won't go anywhere, no one will steal them. Grab York early and if you can't handle the English off the bat beat them to Caernvaron, they usually take a wee while to get their act together on that one from my experience.

Then simply outproduce and destroy England whenever you feel appropriate, leave them with only their French holdings and see how long they last!

[Bones40]

Spain or Portugal have been known to come steal Dublin once in awhile. I personally don't like blitzing the English early. I split my forces into two forces. One heads to York, one to...the castle on the west coast...forget the name. Then slowly take Dublin and the Northern most settlement. From there I either take out the English or I wait for them to attack me, which can take forever in a lot of campaigns. The one I'm in now is nearing turn 40 and they haven't attacked yet. I've taken the two merchant cities on the northern coast of the mainland (Bruges and Antwerp?) and my economy is going great. The only setback is Edward was killed inexplicably in one of the sieges. He was the only one of the body guard to die.

If England doesn't attack soon, I will blitz them out of the game. I just don't like initiating war against Catholic.

[Viking Prince]

I might be repeating myself, but I did a short campaign guide on Scotland.

[Silent Assassin]

I might be repeating myself, but I did a short campaign guide on Scotland.

Hey you stop advertizing your guides

[Pink Beard]

Hey you stop advertizing your guides

...


ofcourse you would NEEVVVEERRRRrrrrr EEvvveerrr do that yourself, no?

[Squid]

Moved to Strategies

[Fakir]

The worst advice anyone can give is to allow yourself to wait and see whether or not a settlement will surrender. Not only are you wasting time on a chance, but even if they do surrender, you have wasted time and resources. It's a lose-lose situation. In the end, the amount of turns lost besieging can never make up for ANY extra cost and effort required for taking the settlement right away.

[Viking Prince]

The worst advice anyone can give is to allow yourself to wait and see whether or not a settlement will surrender. Not only are you wasting time on a chance, but even if they do surrender, you have wasted time and resources. It's a lose-lose situation. In the end, the amount of turns lost besieging can never make up for ANY extra cost and effort required for taking the settlement right away.

Do you follow your own advice when taking El Cid at Valencia?

Seriously -- there are many reasons for waiting out a seige. Some settlements are only 3 turns. Some early resources cannot be retrained or replaced. Some of us roleplay and choose not to use mercenaries. Sometimes a smaller force is effective in a seige, but the units are not available to be effective in an assault.

Also, to borrow from naval phrases -- there is the value to a 'fleet in being' and not taking casualties. The value in keeping the units intact and available for action may be the primary purpose of the stack. Beseiging is only a secondary use to keep the units 'busy'.

[Sith_Lord]

Can it be noted that York only takes 2 turns to surrender and the English field army already outnumbers you, so a waste of units doesn't seem wise given the 2 TURN wait.

[Fakir]

ONLY two turns? Two turns can make all the difference.

[Fakir]

Here's an example of a generic, small sieging army that you would need to take an average, early game settlement. Two mailed knights, one mounted sergeants, two peasant archers, three spear militia, one town militia, one ballista. This is just an example army. Add to this another 300-500 upkeep for faction-specific units thrown in the mix. To make up for preference, we can give or we can take a few, making the upkeep anything between 1,500-2,00 per turn - not counting your general.

The average settlement of this size has a 4-5 turn surrender. Let's make it four. This makes 6,000 - 8,000 florins lost on upkeep for your siege.

Now, consider the five turns of income this settlement could have netted you if you had taken it right away - about 700 a turn. That's 2,800 lost on income.

Finally, we must consider the military progress these troops, and their general, could have contributed to if they had not been commited to this siege for 4-5 turns. This is a little more difficult to calculate, and, in the long run, makes even more of an impact than the other figures combined.

Money lost: 10,000 florins
Time lost: priceless


Yes, I took my own advice when I captured El Cid's settlement.

And to reply to your naval wisdom - with all the money you could make by taking a settlement right away rather than sieging, you could easily train two more armies, each on par with your "fleet in being" - aka sitting ducks.

[Viking Prince]

Your example includes seige artillery which is not available until the training facilities are built.

Your typical army is heavy weighted towards cavalry which is not consistent with the early era historically. Also, in my experience, the early stacks are not 1500 florins per turn in upkeep plus a general, bit more likely 450 to 635 florins per turn. This seems to be a blitz strategy and also taking place after 1100.

Also, the cavalry is neary useless in assaulting a settlement. If you are going to go into the settlement center where units do not break, why use your precious cavalry?

In the end -- I think we have a difference in style and taste. I prefer a slower pace and time to allow for diplomacy and expansion of the family tree without adoption. You seem to prefer more of a blitz style.

You did not state how you finance such large stacks early on. Since I do not sack and prefer to upgrade existing settlements -- this may be another difference in styles.

As long as it is fun for you -- go for it. But consider that there may be other options that can be enjoyable as well. Perhaps you might consider Lands to Conquor for a change of pace.

[Fakir]

I see what you are saying. When I played Civilizations, after having played some time I also decided in favour of less effective approaches that I thought would be a little more interested, kind of on the side of a more RP approach - as you said, family tree and diplomacy.

The ballista was just an example and isn't necessary at all. I don't see why you say, however, that this is a post-1100AD army. How come? Mounted knights and sergeants are incredibly powerful in field battles early on, so it would make sense to have some with you. Being that this is early game, you will not have an army that is specialised for sieging - wouldn't have peasant archers either.

I don't think this is a particularly large stack at all. This would be an army with which I would face the AI in the open, and would then use the same army to besiege the next target settlement. That said, I challenge you to name me a capable siege army that costs between 450 - 635 florins per turn.

How does the Lands of Conquer change the pace specifically? I've heard about it before, and that it makes the AI better in battles. It sounds interesting.

[Viking Prince]

I see what you are saying. When I played Civilizations, after having played some time I also decided in favour of less effective approaches that I thought would be a little more interested, kind of on the side of a more RP approach - as you said, family tree and diplomacy.

The ballista was just an example and isn't necessary at all. I don't see why you say, however, that this is a post-1100AD army. How come? Mounted knights and sergeants are incredibly powerful in field battles early on, so it would make sense to have some with you. Being that this is early game, you will not have an army that is specialised for sieging - wouldn't have peasant archers either.

I don't think this is a particularly large stack at all. This would be an army with which I would face the AI in the open, and would then use the same army to besiege the next target settlement. That said, I challenge you to name me a capable siege army that costs between 450 - 635 florins per turn.

How does the Lands of Conquer change the pace specifically? I've heard about it before, and that it makes the AI better in battles. It sounds interesting.

The 1100AD comment is from the ability to generate balistas (which are pretty poor in seige -- I would rather use them in open field operations)

A typical attack on Vilnius early in the Russian campaign is a good example. A more familiar example since I just started a Spanish campaign has to do with Zaragoza. A general, two militia spears and two peasant archers. You can assault or wait out the seige. Either way the general and peasant archers will not be free of upkeep. What you gain is more of a blitz where mercenaries need to be recruited to keep on the move. There is also the problem of sucking up all of the mercenaries in the pool before the AI can grab them. This makes the AI weaker.

As to the Lands to Conquer mod --

Lands to Conquer


Also if Calvin approves the article -- I will have a brief interview of some players of the mod in the June issue of the Eagle Standard.

[Silent Assassin]

Viking Prince;5279467]The 1100AD comment is from the ability to generate balistas (which are pretty poor in seige -- I would rather use them in open field operations)

Balistas are also good defending a city place it in your city center and protect them with spears and archers behind the spears, the enemies coming in the roads will be bottleneck a bit and let the archers and balistas do their work

As to the Lands to Conquer mod --

Lands to Conquer

Also if Calvin approves the article -- I will have a brief interview of some players of the mod in the June issue of the Eagle Standard.

Why didn't you ask me???

[Fakir]

Not so poor. If you have a ballista, you don't need a ram. You save one turn from having to build siege equipment. Also, as we all know too well, a ram can burn...

[Fakir]

Zaragoza is by no means a substantially defended settlement, I'm sorry to dishearten you. It is well bellow average, and in my original post I was giving a model army for the average AI faction's settlement.

[Silent Assassin]

Zaragoza is by no means a substantially defended settlement, I'm sorry to dishearten you. It is well bellow average, and in my original post I was giving a model army for the average AI faction's settlement.

My suggestion to you would be to edit your post when you want to add someting , I've seen you do this a couple of times, it's just a suggestions